get_node_subscription

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided. Description only says 'Get subscription status', implying a read operation, but does not explicitly state it is read-only or disclose any side effects or behavioral traits. The burden is on the description since annotations are absent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, no filler. Front-loaded with purpose. Concise but not overly terse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Has output schema, so return values are covered elsewhere. With one parameter and a simple purpose, the description is adequate but lacks detail on what 'subscription status' includes. Could be more informative.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter 'node'. Description adds 'The node name' but schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's title and type.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states verb 'Get', resource 'subscription status', and scope 'for a node'. It distinguishes from other get_node_* tools like get_node_status, though 'subscription' might be slightly ambiguous for those unfamiliar with Proxmox.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. Among many similar get_node_* tools, the description provides no differentiation.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.